Back
2019 Supreme(All) 2359
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Manju Rani Chauhan, J.
Geeta Devi - Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. And & Others - Opposite Party
Application U/S 482 No. - 3761 of 2020
Decided On : 03-02-2020
For the Applicant : Om Prakash Vishwakarma
Point of Law
Officer-in-charge of police station has power to investigate U/S 156(1) in such case. Magistrate has power to take cognizance u/s 190 Cr.P.C. on receiving the 'complaint'.
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the order passed by the Special Judge, S.C./S.T (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Jaunpur in Misc. Case No. 117 of 2019 (Geeta Devi vs. Satya Narayan and others), under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., Police Station-Sikrara, District-Jaunpur by which the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant has been directed to be treated as complaint case – Held, It is evident that the police can investigate into matters relating to commission of 'cognizable offences' brought to its notice under section 154 Cr.P.C. Officer-in-charge of police station has power to investigate U/S 156(1) in such case. Magistrate has power to take cognizance u/s 190 Cr.P.C. on receiving the 'complaint'. Thus the matter relating to section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. relates to power of Magistrate to order investigation by police in matters relating to cognizable offences brought before it through complaint. Complaint has been defined in section 2(d) Cr.P.C. of as follows : "complaint' means any allegation made orally or in writing to a Magistrate, with a view to his taking action under this Code, that some person whether known or unknown, has committed an offence, but does not include a Police report." Code of Criminal Procedure has given different type of powers to deal with such matters relating to commission of cognizable offences when brought before it – Application allowed. (Paras 10, 12 and 13)
Facts of the Case
The complaint filed by the applicant clearly discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. He, therefore, submits that once the application filed by the applicant under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence, the Magistrate has erred in law in directing to proceed with the application as a complaint case.
Finding of the Court
It is evident that the police can investigate into matters relating to commission of 'cognizable offences' brought to its notice under section 154 Cr.P.C. Officer-in-charge of police station has power to investigate U/S 156(1) in such case. Magistrate has power to take cognizance u/s 190 Cr.P.C. on receiving the 'complaint'. Thus the matter relating to section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. relates to power of Magistrate to order investigation by police in matters relating to cognizable offences brought before it through complaint. Complaint has been defined in section 2(d) Cr.P.C. of as follows : "complaint' means any allegation made orally or in writing to a Magistrate, with a view to his taking action under this Code, that some person whether known or unknown, has committed an offence, but does not include a Police report." Code of Criminal Procedure has given different type of powers to deal with such matters relating to commission of cognizable offences when brought before.
Result: Application allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Om Prakash Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the applicant, and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the order dated 30.10.2019, passed by the Special Judge, S.C./S.T (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Jaunpur in Misc. Case No. 117 of 2019 (Geeta Devi vs. Satya Narayan and others), under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., Police Station-Sikrara, District-Jaunpur by which the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant has been directed to be treated as complaint case.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a perusal of the complaint filed by the applicant clearly discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. He, therefore, submits that once the application filed by the applicant under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence, the Magistrate has erred in law in directing to proceed with the application as a complaint case. He further submits that the right and interest of the applicant is involved in the present case as the property of applicant has been looted. The learned counsel for the applicant has contended with vehemence that the court below has passed the impugned order in a mechanical manner and has ignored the Judgment of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of U.P. and others reported in 2014 (2) SCC 1.
4. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand has supported the impugned order and has pointed out that the grievance of the applicant has not gone unattended by the court below. The court below after taking into consideration the entire gamut of the facts and circumstances of the case has rightly concluded to treat the application filed by the applicant under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. as a complaint. The applicant shall still have an opportunity to prove his case before the court below.
5. Considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
6. A perusal of the impugned order shows that no sufficient reason has been disclosed, on the basis of which, the Magistrate has proceeded to treat the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. as a complaint.
7. From the record, it transpires that in the present case, the right and interest of the applicant in her property is involved. The allegations made in the application filed under section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. are not only serious, but also show the commission of a cognizable offence. The applicant has alleged in the complaint that on 19.06.2019 at about 09:00 p.m., the accused persons came at the house of applicant and destroyed her house and when the applicant objected the same, accused-Sunil Mishra and Anil Mishra threatened the applicant by putting gun on applicant's chest and, thereafter, Sunil Mishra entered into the house of applicant and misbehaved with the daughter-in-law of applicant. They also forcefully took away several properties of the applicant. However, the Magistrate vide order dated 30.10.2019 directed that the said application shall be treated as a complaint. A perusal of the order impugned passed by the Magistrate shows that the Magistrate was of the view that since all the evidence required in respect of the incident which occurred on the alleged date can be given by the applicant, there is no necessity of police investigation in the matter.
8. In view of the nature of the allegations made by the applicant in the application filed under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C., the Special Judge, S.C./S.T (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Jaunpur ought to have allowed the application and directed the police of Police Station Sikrara, Jaunpur to investigate into the matter and, thereafter, submit a report.
9. Sections 154 and 156 Cr.P.C. provide procedure for registration and investigation of complaint. The same are quoted herein under:-
"154. Information in cognizable cases- (1) Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, if given orally to an officer in charge of a police
